>> ^Yogi:

I've been noticing the schadenfreude runs thick when it comes to this situation with Lohan. People around the internet are splooging with glee over the fact that she'll be sent to prison...
Why? I get some people have sad little pathetic lives and they're very happy to smile at someone else's horrible life. Why so much joy though? It's very upsetting to me.


A lot of responses to this are plain, ol' schadenfreude, but I see this as an opportunity for her to actually learn from her mistakes. Maybe she'll have some time to reconsider not only her actions, but what people should be in her life. So, yea. I'm kind of happy about it.

She'll be out of jail in about a month for 'good behaviour' and overcrowding anyway.

Your video, Lindsay Lohan Sent to Jail for 90 days, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^curiousity:

It's too bad that she has lead such a sheltered life that she didn't realize that there are consequences that her money and mob fame can't overcome. Even though it may be tough for her, I hope that she is able to learn from the experience.
I initially wanted to write something else, but I'm trying hard to practice mudita these days. Although this isn't directly related, I'm also trying to avoid its antithesises.


Translation: TAKE THAT BIOTCH!

>> ^NordlichReiter:
Cocaine? Hit and Run?
Only 90 days?
Wait, it's a lawsuit. Did the state decide not to press charges?
This sort of reminds me of the Chappaquiddick Incident Only in this case no one died.


Vince Neil only got 20 days for pleading guilty to manslaughter in his duii accident (with a 2.5 million dollar fine). Lindsay has a bad lawyer or a small bank account.
Or...Vince just got drunk and killed somebody while being the poster boy for sex, drugs and rock'nRoll.
Lindsay disrespected the authorities!!
I'm not picking on Vince here, or standing up for Miss Lohan. I'm just talking about our legal system.

>> ^JiggaJonson:

It's not a dupe but see also: http://videosift.com/video/Lindsay-Lohan-Sent-to-Jail-for-90-days


Thanks, But that just means whatever votes it gets I should get as well

It's not a dupe but see also: http://videosift.com/video/Lindsay-Lohan-Sent-to-Jail-for-90-days

enjoy! http://videosift.com/video/Lindsay-Lohan-Sent-to-Jail-for-90-days

thought you might enjoy this as much as i did: http://videosift.com/video/Lindsay-Lohan-Sent-to-Jail-for-90-days

>> ^bramankp:
>> I'm reminded of a scene in Mean Girls.
Gretchen: That is so fetch!
Regina: Gretchen, stop trying to make fetch happen! It's not going to happen!


There's an old Latvian proverb: "A quote from a shitty Lindsay Lohan movie doesn't make the best rebuke."

^Sadly, I can.. with Lindsay Lohan

"I just had a beer... who wants to DO me??"

"Niiiaaarrrrrnnnn"

Tags for this video have been changed from 'lindsay, lohan, horatio sanz, jimmy fallon, amy poehler, kenan thompson, fred armisen' to 'snl, lindsay, lohan, horatio sanz, jimmy fallon, amy poehler, kenan, fred armisen' - edited by burdturgler

Tags for this video have been changed from 'debbie, downer, snl, depressing' to 'lindsay, lohan, horatio sanz, jimmy fallon, amy poehler, kenan thompson, fred armisen' - edited by burdturgler

Educational subtext is there yes.

I don't want to overlap with for instance an O'relliy or Olberman rant (or for that matter Colbert or Stewart), they have their lies/news/latenight channels, but a longer interview with anyone important enough would qualify.

Some of those god-awful "lectures" by Ken Ham or Kent Hovind are also welcome, even if they usually require a * lies too.

Should I just keep interviews out of the channel? I think it may be getting a bit too widely defined already.

Naw, Interviews stay but they had to have an educational subtext. Interviewing Lindsay Lohan for 30 seconds about her skanky ways won't go.

>> ^rougy:
>> ^Raaagh:
I think the increased severity due to increasing commonality of hatred directed at the USA, and the fact that the people who are planning and carrying out the attacks are hardened warriors with dehumanising religious motivations.

What do you think is causing that hatred?


this is an interesting question. i asked a good friend of mine who studies islam and the middle east and has spent alot of time in the region..
"what do they want?"
his answer was about how at one time there was the persian empire, the ottoman empire, the arab world was rich in trade, philosophy, intellect, cultural and a serious world power. now, they live in caves and squalor. his answer was they just dont want to be poor anymore. most of them are illiterate, desperate and highly religious. so.. they cant actually read the qaran, but someone who can comes to the village and tells them what it says. or what his interpretation would be. and basically tells an entire village of otherwise ignorant people that they once were kings and now they live in squalor and they live in squalor because of oppression and the perversion of the western world. the exports of western culture to the middle east are brittany spears and lindsay lohan which is highly offensive in its own right, but especially offensive if youre highly religious and live in poverty. you cant blame anyone for seeing that and thinking we are all pigs. you add what they see of our culture and what they see from our leaders. they see we side with israel and most of us are completely ignorant to the details of the conflict, they see we side with india, another conflict we are ignorant of... they also have an excellent propaganda machine and we give them plenty to hate. but basically they just dont want to be poor anymore, blame the us, and are told the qaran demands jihad and that jihad will restore their people to glory.

also, another aspect that makes these ideas spread like wild fire through islamic cultures is that islam has no religous hierarchy. there is no one authority that says "this is what we think about this" or "no, blowing ourselves up wont solve anything"

Bollocks.

I wouldn't have known that Lindsay Lohan has no problem with wearing animal fur, and neither would any of you, if PETA hadn't done this.

Whether or not you agree with it is missing the entire point of why people do these kinds of stunts in the first place.